ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2026
The role of regional nodal irradiation in clinically node-positive breast cancer patients who undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy and breast-conserving surgery.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer management has increased, leading to uncertainties in adjuvant treatment benefits.
methodsWe reviewed (cN +) stage II-III breast cancers that underwent NAC and breast-conserving treatment (BCT) between 2010 and 2020 in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Overall survival (OS) was compared between those who did and did not receive regional nodal irradiation (RNI).
resultsThe 7137 cN + patients had a mean age of 54.3 ± 10.9. Breast and nodal pCR rates were 25.9% and 35%. RNI was administered in 57.7% (50.0% of the ypN0 and 61.9% of the ypN +). The mean number of nodes removed was 10.3 ± 7.7 in the RNI + and 9.5 ± 7.6 in the RNI- groups (p < 0.01). The mean number of positive nodes was 2.5 ± 4.0 in the RNI + and 1.8 ± 3.5 in the RNI- groups (p < 0.01). In a median follow-up of 68 months, RNI + patients had a worse OS than RNI- patients (79.9% vs. 84.4%, p < 0.001). In the ypN0 population, there was no OS difference between RNI + and RNI- groups (p = 0.4), however, ypN + patients had worse OS if they were RNI + than RNI- (p = 0.007).
conclusionRNI does not improve OS in cN + patients undergoing a complete response from NAC after BCT. Although recurrence cannot be assessed via this data set, these results support individualized decisions to omit RNI in ypN0 patients following NAC and BCT and emphasize the need for further investigation into the potential benefits or harms of RNI in ypN + patients treated with NAC and BCT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41712033What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.